US-POLITICS
Michael Hamontree
Description
Collection
Title:
US-POLITICS
Creator:
Michael Hamontree
Date:
2/2/2000
Text:
Tony,
I would appreciate seeing a detailed explanation of the basis on which you
make the following statement,
...supporters of the The Harkins Bill,one of the federal O&P initiatives
in the 106th Congress, are attempting to exclude Halo orthoses and Scoliosis
systems from regulation.
As I read the language of the Harkin bill, there is nothing that indicates
an exclusion of such devices. Please show us where you find such an
indication.
It troubles me that you often make the sorts of statements such as the one
quoted above without any specific detail to back up your accusations. I'm
afraid that too many people on the list might simply accept what you post as
fact without taking the time to do the research and reach their own
conclusions.
I also find that many of your postings contain a great deal of smear
tactics. For example you state that,
...profit margins are the main reason...
and
apparently Harkin Bill supporters are of the thinking that wearers of such
devices dont require protection and assurances of providers having a minimum
requirement of educational experience.!!!
Such categorizations of Harkin bill supporters and their motives are
uncalled for and I can assure you that in my case (and many others) they are
completely inaccurate.
Tony, I most certainly disagree with you on most of the issues you raise
regarding the Harkin and Wexler bills. But I do not doubt that your
motivations for supporting the Wexler bill are genuine and in the interest
of patient protection nor would I attempt to categorize them in any other
fashion. However, I do believe that it is time for you to put a stop to your
denigrating remarks toward those with whom you disagree. Let's just deal
with the facts. And if, for some reason, you feel the need to continue
making accusations toward others, please back it up with specific factual
evidence.
Argue the facts and the merits of these two pieces of legislation and rise
above the mudslinging --- for the good of everyone.
Michael Hamontree
-----Original Message-----
From: Tony Barr [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>]
Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2000 8:20 AM
To: <Email Address Redacted>
Subject: Re: Cost of Halo components
Randy,
Good question!
Cant tell you the reasons why but I am sure profit margins are the main
reason supporters of the The Harkins Bill,one of
the federal O&P initiatives in the 106th Congress, are attempting to exclude
Halo orthoses and Scoliosis systems from regulation.The Wexler HR1938
includes these devices in their legislation.
Go figure, apparently Harkin Bill supporters are of the thinking that
wearers of such devices dont require protection and assurances of providers
having a minimum requirement of educational experience.!!!
Tony Barr
I would appreciate seeing a detailed explanation of the basis on which you
make the following statement,
...supporters of the The Harkins Bill,one of the federal O&P initiatives
in the 106th Congress, are attempting to exclude Halo orthoses and Scoliosis
systems from regulation.
As I read the language of the Harkin bill, there is nothing that indicates
an exclusion of such devices. Please show us where you find such an
indication.
It troubles me that you often make the sorts of statements such as the one
quoted above without any specific detail to back up your accusations. I'm
afraid that too many people on the list might simply accept what you post as
fact without taking the time to do the research and reach their own
conclusions.
I also find that many of your postings contain a great deal of smear
tactics. For example you state that,
...profit margins are the main reason...
and
apparently Harkin Bill supporters are of the thinking that wearers of such
devices dont require protection and assurances of providers having a minimum
requirement of educational experience.!!!
Such categorizations of Harkin bill supporters and their motives are
uncalled for and I can assure you that in my case (and many others) they are
completely inaccurate.
Tony, I most certainly disagree with you on most of the issues you raise
regarding the Harkin and Wexler bills. But I do not doubt that your
motivations for supporting the Wexler bill are genuine and in the interest
of patient protection nor would I attempt to categorize them in any other
fashion. However, I do believe that it is time for you to put a stop to your
denigrating remarks toward those with whom you disagree. Let's just deal
with the facts. And if, for some reason, you feel the need to continue
making accusations toward others, please back it up with specific factual
evidence.
Argue the facts and the merits of these two pieces of legislation and rise
above the mudslinging --- for the good of everyone.
Michael Hamontree
-----Original Message-----
From: Tony Barr [mailto:<Email Address Redacted>]
Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2000 8:20 AM
To: <Email Address Redacted>
Subject: Re: Cost of Halo components
Randy,
Good question!
Cant tell you the reasons why but I am sure profit margins are the main
reason supporters of the The Harkins Bill,one of
the federal O&P initiatives in the 106th Congress, are attempting to exclude
Halo orthoses and Scoliosis systems from regulation.The Wexler HR1938
includes these devices in their legislation.
Go figure, apparently Harkin Bill supporters are of the thinking that
wearers of such devices dont require protection and assurances of providers
having a minimum requirement of educational experience.!!!
Tony Barr
Citation
Michael Hamontree, “US-POLITICS,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 6, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/213753.
